As an author I just don't think she is amazing,she shows glimpses of excellent writing and imagery.

But the key reason the Harry Potter books are successful is the appeal to children and adults alike.
The concept of magic appeals to every human as its something we cannot grasp without a writer aiding our imagination.

The books don't ask the readers any deep and meaningful questions,after reading a book i usually reflect on it and the ulterior messages the author was trying to convey,but after reading a Harry Potter book i can't do that,as there is nothing to reflect on.....

After the final book is released and comes to a possibly timid and uninspiring conclusion I hope it confirms that as an author JK Rowling is good,but not great.Although the Potter books will retain a legendary status (rightly or wrongly) they could of been alot better in terms of imagery,emotive writing and character exploration.For example,Harry Potter as a character is one dimensional and rather mundane.

I like the books,but they will never be anything more than good books for me.
Your Thoughts?

I don't think they were ever meant to be some inspirational book. It is there to entertain, and I think JK Rowling has achieved this. I don't think she is over rated at all, the books are fantastic and manage to keep the audience throughout the books. I think the eagerly anticipated seventh book says it all tbh.

I think the books are great because of the fact that it is well written and keeps the reader engaged throughout the novel and how can you say she shows glimpses of excellent imagery.It is a book about witches and wizards without brilliant imagery you just wouldn't be able to enjoy the book. I don't think the book has been successful because of the stuff she is writing about but more the way the book has been written is what has made it successful.

(Original post by dumdumdumdidum)
I don't think they were ever meant to be some inspirational book. It is there to entertain, and I think JK Rowling has achieved this. I don't think she is over rated at all, the books are fantastic and manage to keep the audience throughout the books. I think the eagerly anticipated seventh book says it all tbh.

I like her writing. Alot, I love the world she has created on those pages, I do think it goes pretty in-depth, anymore and those things will be like encyclopedias (sp?). I don't think shes the best at writing about love, the boy loves girl kind that is, friendship and family yes but the sexual attraction kind? no, but maybe thats because Im a H/Hr through an through.
I do think they deserve the hype, they mean something different to everyone who picks them up and reads them, I think we all get something different out of them.

what j.k.rowling did is made us talk and talk and talk about her books. this is an achievement. the books focus at younger ages but even older people read this stuff although it is not for their age. she uses imagination. kids love it cz she made it simple for them.. she introduced them to the word of wizards, of (generally) reading a book instead of other unhealthy hobbies and as she said lately she mentions life and death issues to make them familiar to youngsters.

she is not perfect but who is?
maybe today's people (children) don't need perfection. . .

They were relatively decent kids books up until the fourth when I think everyone got too scared to edit her any more. The last book was awful; you felt like getting out a red pen and editing it for her!!! I was also quite disgusted when I turned the page to happen upon an entire two pages filled with capital letters. Apparently that's the only way she can express anger now .

(Original post by campbell87)
I like her writing. Alot, I love the world she has created on those pages, I do think it goes pretty in-depth, anymore and those things will be like encyclopedias (sp?). I don't think shes the best at writing about love, the boy loves girl kind that is, friendship and family yes but the sexual attraction kind? no, but maybe thats because Im a H/Hr through an through.
I do think they deserve the hype, they mean something different to everyone who picks them up and reads them, I think we all get something different out of them.

Do we actually want sexual attraction in children's books?

I think she balances it quite nicely especially in the Ron/Hermione relationship which develops over a period of years. Would you prefer them to be having it off round the back of the bike shed every five minutes? Having pages and pages of lust may be okay in a bodice-ripper but not in Harry Potter.

I think the books were dark and thrilling, yet tinged with British humour, which set them apart. She may be overrated, the books overhyped, but JK put reading back on the map- no book will ever have the effect of HP. For this she must be commended.

I completely agree and have thought so throughout the series. There are few perks in her writing where a real sense of atmosphere is brought in, otherwise, there is no 'philosophy', as it were, to ponder on and nothing of true literary merit - it's all just plot. Good plot, but just plot.

(Original post by albolton)
I think the books were dark and thrilling, yet tinged with British humour, which set them apart. She may be overrated, the books overhyped, but JK put reading back on the map- no book will ever have the effect of HP. For this she must be commended.

Hmm, I'm not so sure whether I'd agree with that, actually... As far as I can tell, so far that 'effect' has primarily been that lots of people were turned into avid readers of Harry Potter books, but not necessarily into avid readers in general. Maybe I'm being a bit pessimistic here, but I'm not entirely convinced all those children who were dying to get hold of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows and finished it within a day will actually go on to be equally enthusiastic about other books by other writers...
Don't get me wrong, I'm not disputing that the Harry Potter series turned some people into readers (which is a good thing, obviously), but that probably took place on a much smaller scale than the sales figures of the Potter books might suggest.

To be frank it's not deep it does not ask any fundamental questions about the subject, it does not challenge the reader to think about the nature of good and evil, or to see thin divide between the two which can be caused by corruption or power. But let's just say that it has a mass appeal, because it appeals to a wide audience, and leave it at that, because if it is ever considered a landmark in fantasy writing then I have a noose a beam and chair I can kick over.

(Original post by albolton)
I think the books were dark and thrilling, yet tinged with British humour, which set them apart. She may be overrated, the books overhyped, but JK put reading back on the map- no book will ever have the effect of HP. For this she must be commended.

No philosophical works, nothing?

I think the Bible has beaten her effect hands down. And I think The Lord of the Rings has had more effect after all it's 50 years on and we all still know it well and love it, we also know and how it generated a whole new impetus in the fantasy field to which many authors owe nodding respect to.

LotR was voted Englands most popular book, I think we can safely say that if anything HP is a book that has reinvigorated the market, but has done nothing like as much as the early fantasy writers to create such a market.

I hate that Harry Potter is known as 'the book' that got children back into reading whether it's true or not, I can't understand its appeal and think there are so many other better books that children could've gotten into.
I try to read through the books and all I see is concepts and ideas that have already been done in other fantasy stories, I struggle to see something that's so fresh and original I could understand why people love it so much.

I love reading the Harry Potter books and got very excited about Deathly Hallows, but, as Dionysus said, they are certainly not classic literature. The books have great plot lines, and great characters (I think), as well as a good balance of humour, but I sometimes find the writing a bit cringeworthy. Some of her similes/metaphors feel forced; I feel she is much stronger on dialogue than on description.

But then she does immerse people of all ages in her books - she has got to be doing something right!

So I don't think she is overrated because I think most people accept her books as great for what they are, and don't expect philosophical fantasy or writing that is worthy of Dickens.

(Original post by {Clarabella})
I love reading the Harry Potter books and got very excited about Deathly Hallows, but, as Dionysus said, they are certainly not classic literature. The books have great plot lines, and great characters (I think), as well as a good balance of humour, but I sometimes find the writing a bit cringeworthy. Some of her similes/metaphors feel forced; I feel she is much stronger on dialogue than on description.

But then she does immerse people of all ages in her books - she has got to be doing something right!

So I don't think she is overrated because I think most people accept her books as great for what they are, and don't expect philosophical fantasy or writing that is worthy of Dickens.

They are not 'great' though,and the last book was a pure farce.It confirmed everything i ever thought about her as a writer.The ending was the worst of possibly any book i'v read and the final showdown was just so cliched.I exagerate not when i say i could of made it more emotive and climactic.

Nice use of context.I just said the final chapters were complete rubbish.
Rememeber the final duel was a culmination of over 5000 pages of previous Potter books,Voldemort - one of the greatest wizards to ever live against Potter -his mortal enemy.
Sorry for expecting too much.
Instead what did we get? cliche cliche cliche,followed by a sudden death where a legendary wizard kills himself by accident.I felt nothing,it just wasn't emotive or good.